28590-Article Text-74224-3-10-20200603

The Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem-based Learning
Bridging Academic Disciplines with Interdisciplinary Project-based Learning: Challenges
and Opportunities
Melissa Warr (Brigham Young University)

Richard E. West (Brigham Young University)
IJPBL is Published in Open Access Format through the Generous Support of the School of Education at Indiana
University, the Jeannine Rainbolt College of Education at the University of Oklahoma, and the Center for Re-
search on Learning and Technology at Indiana University.
Copyright Holder: Melissa Warr and Richard E. West
https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28590 March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

The Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem-based Learning
Bridging Academic Disciplines with Interdisciplinary
Project-based Learning: Challenges and Opportunities
Melissa Warr and Richard E. West (Brigham Young University)
ABSTRACT
This article describes the implementation of an interdisciplinary design studio as a means to teach creative problem-solving
through project-based learning. “Learning and Innovation Skills” has been designated as a core skill that students need to
be successful in today’s world, and project-based learning is one approach to helping students develop these skills. After
describing the early genesis and development of the interdisciplinary design studio, the article describes results of initial
research into the students’ experiences in studio courses. Students described courses as flexible and reported high levels of
motivation stemming from the authenticity of the problems. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of the studio, some stu-
dents described deepening disciplinary skills while at the same time being exposed to cross-disciplinary skills. They believed
the courses helped develop interdisciplinary collaboration, creativity, and communication skills.
Keywords: project-based learning, design studio, interdisciplinary creativity
The Partnership for 21st Century Learning has designated meaning outside of the school environment. However, this
“Learning and Innovation Skills,” including critical think- method is under-researched and under-utilized. What is
ing and problem-solving, communication, collaboration, needed are more examples of interdisciplinary collaboration
and creativity, as core skills students need to be success- through authentic, project-based learning in higher educa-
ful in today’s world (“Partnership for 21st century skills: tion. In this article, we describe the development and ini-
Framework for 21st century learning,” 2014). One strategy tial implementation of an interdisciplinary design studio to
that can help improve how we teach and experience creative support project-based learning. In particular, we report on
problem-solving is interdisciplinary collaboration. Because how students experienced courses and the thickly authen-
many employees are asked to solve problems themselves that tic learning environment and challenges of interdisciplinary
are increasingly complex and interdisciplinary, this type of collaboration. Rather than provide an in-depth description
divide-crossing collaboration has become essential to prob- of a single interdisciplinary project-based learning course,
lem-solving. As Katehi and Ross (2007) argued, dialogues we summarize student experiences across a range of courses
across disciplines allow us to “address critical and socially held in the interdisciplinary design studio. We believe our
relevant issues leading to far greater cultural impact” (p. research reflects the realities of implementing an interdisci-
89). Indeed, English (2008) explained that “employees draw plinary design space at a university, and our findings provide
effectively on interdisciplinary knowledge in solving prob- insight for others striving to teach interdisciplinary collabo-
lems and communicating their findings” (p. 188), raising, ration and design in higher education.
in her mind, the question of how schools can best prepare
students for this type of work environment. Literature Review
One approach with the potential to foster creative prob- In this article, we describe the initial implementation of an
lem-solving is project-based learning, the type of authen- interdisciplinary design studio in a university library. The
tic problem-solving that is characteristic of design studios. studio space was created to support interdisciplinary project-
Furthermore, interdisciplinary design studios may develop based learning. Before describing the development of the
students’ interdisciplinary collaboration and problem-solv- studio, we review other literature on project-based learning,
ing skills by allowing them to collaborate on an authen- interdisciplinary collaboration and creativity, and design stu-
tic project that has personal meaning as well as authentic dio pedagogy.
https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28590 March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Warr, M. & West, R. E. Bridging Academic Disciplines with Interdisciplinary Project-based Learning
Project-based Learning and original thinking, providing new ways to solve problems
(Wilson & Blackwell, 2013). Collaborators must learn to
Both project-based learning and problem-based learning are
integrate the vocabulary, perspectives, and core values from
open-ended, learner-centered approaches that emphasize
other disciplines into their own work, helping them view
students’ independence and collaboration by centering on
problems from different perspectives and making the way for
solving a problem (Brassler & Dettmers, 2017). However,
new approaches to solving them (Kellam & Cramond, 2010;
while problem-based learning emphasizes knowledge gained
Wilson & Blackwell, 2013). Interdisciplinary thinking can
while solving some problem, project-based learning focuses
enable participants to find novel solutions to complex prob-
on the production of some artifact (Grant, 2011). Core fea-
lems in future work (Wilson & Blackwell, 2013).
tures of project-based learning include an authentic project
Although valuable, interdisciplinary work can be chal-
that drives learning (Brassler & Dettmers, 2017; Grant, 2011;
lenging. Challenges include managing teams of diverse stu-
Helle, Tynjälä, & Olkinuoura, 2006; Lee, Blackwell, Drake, &
dents and faculty, balancing the depth and breadth of student
Moran, 2014), learner autonomy (Hell et al., 2006; Lee et al.,
learning, and navigating university structures. First, Brassler
2014), active exploration of the problem by gathering needed
and Dettmers (2017) highlighted the high potential for con-
resources (Lee et al., 2014), collaboration in teams (Grant,
flict among interdisciplinary groups. Teams can struggle to
2011; Lee et al., 2014), and embedded assessment practices,
communicate across disciplinary boundaries, find common
including assessment of the final project (Lee et al., 2014).
goals, set appropriate expectations, and estimate time and
Lee et al. also suggested community partnerships, where stu-
effort for project completion. This can lead to a high rate
dents collaborate with professionals, as an important com-
of failure in interdisciplinary programs (Lee, 2014). Thus,
ponent of project-based learning. In this article, we discuss
participants (students and faculty members) need support
a certain type of project-based learning—interdisciplinary
to effectively engage in interdisciplinary problem-solving
project-based learning in a design studio—as a method for
(Brassler & Dettmers, 2017; Epstein, 2005; Spelt, Biemans,
developing interdisciplinary, creative problem-solving skills.
Tobi, Luning, & Mulder, 2009). Second, degree programs
Creativity, Design, and Interdisciplinary Collaboration must carefully evaluate the tradeoffs between disciplin-
ary depth and interdisciplinary breadth. Davies and Devlin
The type of project-based learning described here utilizes
(2010) emphasized the need for students to develop deep
interdisciplinary design, which both requires and inspires
disciplinary knowledge, including disciplinary vocabulary
creativity. Here, we use Stein’s (1953) standard definition of
and cognitive maps, and cautioned interdisciplinary work
creativity: “The creative work is a novel work that is accepted
can detract from these goals. Finally, university structures
as tenable or useful or satisfying by a group in some point in
can hinder interdisciplinary work for both faculty and stu-
time” (p. 311). In other words, creativity is creating some-
dents. Barriers include difficulty assessing student learning
thing that is both an original idea and effectively fulfills some
(Lyall, Meagher, Bandola, & Kettle, 2015), evaluating teach-
purpose. Design, on the other hand, describes “the concep-
ing and scholarship (Davies & Devlin, 2010), coordinat-
tion and realization of new things,” (Cross, 2006, p. 1), a
ing logistics, including scheduling and allocating resources
quality of which can be creativity. The “new things” are not
(Davies & Devlin, 2010; Kezar, 2005; Lyall et al., 2015;
just physical objects, but can also include activities, services,
McCoy & Gardener, 2012), and assigning appropriate credit
process, systems, environments, and values, thus address-
for faculty who participate in interdisciplinary teaching and
ing social, cultural, and systemic problems (see Buchanan,
research (Davies & Devlin, 2010; Kezar, 2005; Lyall et al.,
1998). Design methods are particularly useful for address-
2015; McCoy & Gardener, 2012).
ing complex, “wicked” problems (Rittel & Webber, 1973).
It is critical that we explore new and innovative ways
Wicked problems are intransient, ill-defined, and often sys-
to teach collaborative, interdisciplinary problem-solving
temic problems that resist solution (Jordan, Kelinsasser, &
skills to students. An exciting example is the proposal from
Roe, 2014). Designers’ patterns of reframing problems while
Connor, Sosa, Jackson, and Marks (2017) that described a
searching for solutions make design an effective tool for
new degree with problem-solving skills at the center of a
addressing wicked problems (Dorst, 2015).
nexus of three disciplines so that learning becomes a “jour-
The complexity of the types of problems often addressed
ney through different models of disciplinary collaboration”
in design demands an interdisciplinary approach. Lattuca
(p. 212). In the absence of an entire degree focused on inter-
(2002) described interdisciplinary learning is when everyone
disciplinary, creative problem-solving, an alternative could
works “on a common problem with continuous intercom-
be the development of interdisciplinary problem-solving
munication among the participants from the different disci-
experiences, such as could be attained within a design stu-
plines” (p. 712). Interdisciplinary work can increase creative
dio approach to teaching. In particular, an interdisciplinary
3 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

design studio creates a dedicated space for authentic, inter- studio pedagogy (Bronet, Eglash, Gabrille, Hess, & Kagan,
disciplinary, project-based learning. Next, we describe the 2003; Costantino, Kellam, Cramond, & Crowder, 2010;
historical and pedagogical background of the design studio. Self & Back, 2017; Sochacka, Guyotte, Walther, Kellam, &
Constantino, 2013).
Design Studio
Problem-based learning, project-based learning, inter-
The design studio tradition can be considered a type of disciplinary collaboration, and design studios can all be
authentic, project-based learning. Design studio pedagogy examples of what Shaffer and Resnick (1999) called “thickly
stems from the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in France (Cennamo, authentic” learning experiences (p. 28). They described
2016; Shaffer, 2003). There began the tradition of students four types of authentic learning: learning that is personally
working on open-ended projects with support provided by meaningful, that is closely related to the real-world outside of
discussions amongst pupils and instructors during public school, that allows opportunity to apply disciplinary modes
work presentations. Design-theorist Schön described studio of thinking, and that uses assessment methods that reflect
pedagogy as an example of Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of proxi- the learning process. Shaffer and Resnick suggested thick
mal development, where learners develop facility at the edge authenticity occurs when all four kinds of authentic learning
of their ability with the support of an instructor or more occur together. They described, “‘Thick authenticity’ refers
advanced peer. to activities that are personally meaningful, connected to
In studio-based pedagogy, learning takes place in the social important and interesting aspects of the world beyond the
context of the studio. Students learn by working on authen- classroom, grounded in a systematic approach to thinking
tic problems with other students and professionals from the about problems and issues, and which provide for evaluation
community. Cennamo and Brandt (2012) described a stu- that is meaningfully related to the topics and methods being
dio as a class, a space, and a pedagogical method. Common studied” (p. 195).
characteristics of the studio class include small class sizes, In this article we describe the development of an inter-
a student-centered approach (Brandt et al., 2011; Broadfoot disciplinary design studio created to support project-based
& Bennett, 2003; Brocato, 2009), an extended block of class learning in our university library. Although the space was
time (Brocato, 2009; Cennamo, 2016; Cennamo & Brandt, designed to support a design studio approach, the implemen-
2012; Shaffer, 2003), and faculty to serve as a liaison between tation of studio pedagogy differed across courses. However,
students and the professional community (Brandt et al., what all courses had in common was interdisciplinary,
2011; Shaffer 2003). thickly authentic, project-based learning. It is this type of
Like other forms of project-based learning, the central learning we propose might help students develop interdis-
hub of studio pedagogy is a real, ill-structured project, usu- ciplinary problem-solving skills that enable them to better
ally with a concrete deliverable. Students work on the project address complex, wicked problems.
as individuals or in small groups. Brandt et al. (2011) and The variety of approaches implemented in the design stu-
Brocato (2009) highlighted an iterative process to project dio reflects the authenticity of our research: it is unlikely that
work. Brocato described the process as “propose-critique- any two interdisciplinary studio courses would be imple-
iterate” (p. 141). Students share their project work, either mented the same way. Indeed, Lee et al. (2014) found that
through informal sessions where students present their work even faculty members who participated in the same project-
for self-, peer-, or instructor-critique, or through formal based learning professional development workshops inter-
presentations that can include members of the professional preted and implemented project-based learning differently.
community. Students then use personal reflection and feed- However, we found in our research some common themes
back from others to refine their work. concerning how students experienced interdisciplinary
Studio pedagogy has been applied to a variety of disci- design studio courses. In this article, we start by describing
plinary and interdisciplinary academic settings. Brandt et the development of the studio space and some of the courses
al. (2011) studied design studios in industrial design and held there.
human-computer interaction. Other scholars have stud-
ied studio courses in information management (Carbone & Studio Development and Context
Sheard, 2002), teacher education (Brocato, 2009), instruc-
In 2012, a group of university faculty members at a private
tional design (Clinton & Rieber, 2010), physics (Wilson,
university formed a Creativity, Innovation, and Design
1994), and creative writing (Tassoni & Lewiecki-Wilson,
(CID) group. Membership included faculty from across the
2005). Recognizing the need for students to develop inter-
university, and members met monthly to share ideas, discuss
disciplinary design skills, some have established interdisci-
research partnerships, and promote creativity, innovation,
plinary design courses or programs that incorporate design
and design on campus.
In the winter of 2014, several CID faculty members National Science Foundation. Guidance was provided by
received permission to try teaching interdisciplinary courses faculty from the College of Fine Arts and Communication
on creativity, innovation, and design in the university library. and the College of Engineering and Technology. The game
The core development team included a librarian; faculty was launched in Winter, 2015 (http://dustgame.byu.edu/).
from the business, fine arts, and education school; and a As an extension on this project, in Winter 2015 faculty mem-
consultant for the university’s teaching and learning center bers from the College of Engineering and Technology collab-
(see West, 2016). The space was to serve as a prototype for orated with an English professor to develop a similar game
the kind of interdisciplinary collaboration that could exist if for a technical writing course.
space and opportunity were provided. Surplus furniture was
Social Innovation Design (Fall Year 1–Winter Year 2)
found and the space was quickly created by removing rows
of books and inserting temporary walls. Nearby group study Faculty from the business school assisted students in devel-
rooms were converted into spaces for smaller teams to work oping their own social innovation projects. Students from
together (see Smart, Darowki, & Armstrong, 2019; Zaugg & across the university brought their own ideas to the class,
Warr, 2018). Two courses were immediately moved into the discussed their ideas with faculty and other students, and
space; an additional two courses were taught in the studio designed their projects. Projects included an internship pro-
in the summer, five courses in the fall, and six classes the gram for at-risk high school students and a service organiza-
following winter. Table 1 outlines the courses taught in the tion run by professional athletes.
space included in this study, including a breakdown by stu- The interdisciplinary CID studio began as an experiment,
dent discipline area. and in essence a microcosm of design thinking pedagogy itself
A wide range of courses have been taught in the CID stu- by cycling through multiple cycles of experimentation and
dio. Some classes met regularly in the space, while others uti- improvement. The instructors who taught in this space came
lized the studio for a few class periods. The studio was open from many different departments on campus, fitting with
to all students outside of regular class time. Additionally, the interdisciplinary nature of the space, and thus had var-
a few projects, which we describe below, spanned multiple ied backgrounds in design and problem-solving pedagogy. A
semesters, including Fundacion Paraguaya, DUST, and social commonality in their training was in using design thinking,
innovation design. These projects provide an example of the in similar ways to the method founded by the d.School, to
type of problems students addressed in the interdisciplinary promote creative solutions to “wicked” problems. Most had
design studio. academic training in a design or entrepreneurial discipline,
and several had worked in industry applying these skills.
Fundación Paraguaya (Winter Year 1–Winter Year 2)
The monthly CID faculty meetings described above
In this course, professors from the communications and served as continual professional development for these fac-
business schools challenged students to design a product ulty in the strategies of creative problem-solving. At these
that would generate social change. Students collaborated meetings, the faculty discussed their challenges in teaching
with Martin Burt, founder of Fundación Paraguaya, to pro- and research, shared successes and classroom strategies, and
mote Burt’s Poverty Stoplight program. The program creates discussed methods for improving the instruction of creative
statistical and visual representations of poverty in Paraguay problem-solving in the studio as well as in other classes. In
(“Fundación Paraguaya: Poverty stoplight,” 2014). The particular, faculty who were new to creative problem-solv-
data are used to identify how to best help families and can ing pedagogies were mentored and taught by more senior
be shared with other non-profit organizations. Students teachers. Sometimes these instructors were invited to par-
worked together to create a commercial and documentary ticipate in the same Innovation Boot Camp (1 credit) that
for the organization. A small group of students also traveled was available to students to learn design thinking strate-
to Paraguay to meet with Burt, conduct interviews, and col- gies. Faculty also visited and learned from other programs,
lect film footage. including the Stanford d.School and a regional school with a
design thinking focus. In these ways, the CID faculty group
DUST (Spring Year 1–Winter Year 2)
provided faculty professional development in the method
Students and faculty from the colleges of education, art and espoused by Irby (1996), by first developing an awareness of
communications, information technology, and others col- the importance of creative problem-solving, then developing
laborated with the University of Maryland, NASA, and the general skills, and then through mentoring to develop more
Computer History Museum to develop and promote an advanced skills.
augmented reality game (ARG) focused on teaching sci-
ence principles to teenagers. This project was funded by the

Table 1. Studio courses and participants
Course Business FHSS* Education Engineering Fine Humanities Life Physical Undeclared Unknown Total
Arts and Sciences and Math.
Comm. Science
Winter Year 1** 41 41
A: Children’s 25 25
Storybooks
B: Paraguay 16 16
Spring Year 1 54 54
C: DUST 40 40
Innovation Bootcamp 14 14
Fall Year 1 8 8 3 4 2 8 2 8 43
D: FnArt 301 2 2 4 2 10
E: PDBio 550R 1 4 5
F: BusM 490R 6 1 3 10
G: IPT 664 8 6 14
H: IPT 515R 1 1 2 4
Winter Year 2 1 16 2 5 32 1 0 1 58
FnArt301RMW 9 1 10
FnArt301TTh 1 2 1 21 25
RecM 497R 13 13
BusM 497R 1 2 1 2 6
IT492R 3 1 4
BusM490R 0
TOTALS 9 16 10 8 36 3 8 0 3 103 196
*Family, Home and Social Sciences
**The disciplines of students who participated in Winter Year 1 were not recorded; however, we provide here the total number of students who participated in the courses.
| www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1
Method Interviews
Interviews were conducted individually and in focus groups.
From 2014 to 2016, we researched students’ experiences
During the first semester of the project, instructors recom-
in the studio, including how the pedagogical approach dif-
mended students for interviews in two of the courses. In
fered from other university courses and the resulting chal-
subsequent semesters, all students were invited to participate
lenges and opportunities. We sought to answer the following
in interviews. Student interview questions focused on the
questions:
structure of the course, what students learned in the course,
1. How did students describe their experiences in the
students’ experiences in the course, and use of the library
interdisciplinary design studio courses?
space and resources (see Appendix A for interview proto-
2. What did students describe as the primary chal-
cols). Interviews were also conducted with 12 faculty mem-
lenges and opportunities of the interdisciplinary
bers and here are used to support the descriptions provided
design studio?
by the students. The first author transcribed the interviews,
We used a postpositivist qualitative approach to answer
and the transcriptions served as the primary data source for
our research questions. Hatch (2002) explained that post-
this study.
positivist researchers “are interested in capturing partici-
pant perspectives but in rigorously disciplined ways” (p. 15). Observations
Postpositivist researchers search for patterns, and “when
The first author observed at least one session, and often sev-
potential patterns are discovered, deductive processes are
eral sessions, of each course held in the studio. Observations
used to verify the strength of those patterns in the overall
focused on pedagogical methods used by faculty (includ-
data set” (Hatch, 2002, p. 15). Our research design focused
ing the sequence of activities) and interactions among
on learning about student experiences through interviews,
students and faculty. The first author recorded notes con-
observations, and surveys. Sample sizes varied by semester;
cerning pedagogical events (such as problems presented to
see Table 2 for more detailed information. We searched the
students and the relationships among students and instruc-
data for salient patterns across participants that addressed
tors) and interactions of student teams (See Appendix B for
our research questions.
Table 2. Student research participants by discipline
Interview Survey
Major Group Individual Video Pre Mid1 Mid2 Post
Business 7 11 9 7 9
FHSS* 0 1 1 0
Education 3 1 6 9 5 5
Engineer- 7 10 4 2 14
ing
Fine 15 2 2 4 5 26
Arts and
Comm.
Humanities 5 1 1 2 6
Life 3 1 1 8 5 6
Sciences
Physical 4 1 1 2
and Math.
Science
Undeclared 1 1
Faculty 1 1
TOTAL 41 4 3 36 36 28 68
*Family, Home and Social Sciences

observation form). Observation notes primarily served to After the initial coding was complete, the first author read
triangulate findings identified through analysis of the inter- the data for each code. She recorded patterns, themes, and
view transcripts. impressions in memos and wrote summaries of each memo.
She looked for evidence for and against emerging themes,
Surveys
including verifying identified themes with the Likert scaled
We invited all students who participated in the initial courses survey items. The second author critically examined the
to participate in online surveys. Each semester we conducted coding, memos, and themes and provided suggestions for
a post-course survey (Winter and Spring Semester Year 1: n revisions.
= 37, Fall Year 1: n = 32). We also administered a pre-course Survey results were averaged across all program par-
survey in Fall Year 1 (n = 39), and Winter Year 2 (n = 50). ticipants. Here, we report average Likert-scaled responses
Additionally, we asked students to complete two midterm for several survey items. Student responses range from 1
surveys in Fall Year 1 (n = 36 and n = 32). In addition to free (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). See Appendix D
response questions, the surveys included Likert scale ques- for full survey results.
tions on which students were asked to rate statements about
Trustworthiness
the course experience (see Appendix C for free response
survey items and Appendix D for full Likert scale item Trustworthiness was established through prolonged engage-
results). The items were based on two existing instruments: ment in the research setting, multiple types of triangulation,
the Epstein Creativity Competencies Inventory (Epstein, and an audit trail. First, the study covered a significant period
Schmidt, & Warfel, 2008) and the Runco Ideational Behavior of time (four semesters or 1 1/2 years), and the authors were
Scale (Runco, Plucker, & Lim, 2001). Additional items were continuously engaged with the context across this time. The
added to evaluate course outcomes. Although the survey first author conducted interviews and observations across
did not undergo rigorous testing, the responses provide use- the second, third, and fourth semester. The second author
ful information to triangulate findings established through worked as part of the CID faculty group that developed the
analysis of the interview transcripts and observation notes. studio and conducted the interviews during the first semes-
ter. Second, the study used several types of triangulation (see
Data Analysis
Guba, 1981). Triangulation occurred across participants in
In our research, we followed an analysis process that Hatch multiple courses, through multiple data sources (interviews,
(2002) labeled “typological analysis” (p. 152). As Hatch observations, and surveys), and through comparison of
described, “Data analysis starts by dividing the overall data results with findings and theories from other studies. Finally,
set into categories or groups based on predetermined typol- the first author kept a detailed audit trail and research jour-
ogies” (p. 152). He explained that these typologies can be nal throughout the research study. Both were reviewed by
derived from theory, common sense, or research objectives. the second author.
The first author completed the coding and analysis, with
the second author reviewing the results. The first author Findings
started the analysis by creating a set of codes that reflected
Students described the studio courses taught in the CID
the research questions. These codes included broad cat-
studio as different from other courses they had taken. The
egories such as “how learning is different,” “what students
courses were flexible: students designed their own learning
learned,” “collaboration,” “university aims,” and “library use.”
experience and independently managed their work. Students
As she coded the data, she added additional sub-codes based
were motivated by the nature of the problem to be solved, not
on patterns emerging from the data. For example, students
by course grades. Instructors were mentors and consultants,
described learning about knowledge and skills related to their
and students accessed information through university librar-
own discipline as well as skills and knowledge from other
ies, university specialists, guest speakers, and collaborating
fields. She also observed that students frequently described
organizations. In addition, students were working with stu-
learning attitudes and values not related to any specific disci-
dents and faculty from disciplines different from their own,
pline. Thus, she broke the category “What students learned”
opening up unique challenges and opportunities. In this sec-
into three sections: “Learned in field,” “Learned out of field,”
tion, we will first present themes concerning how students
and “Attitudes and thinking skills.” This division enabled her
described their interdisciplinary design studio experiences.
to identify patterns of what students learned. She first coded
Then we will discuss opportunities and challenges students
passages in interview transcripts, then applied the refined
identified.
coding scheme to the observation notes and open-ended
survey responses.

The Interdisciplinary Design Studio Experience Open-ended learning

The students felt that they learned more in this type of setting The experiential nature of studio courses stemmed from the
than in a traditional course. One student explained, “You’re open-ended nature of the learning environment. Students felt
not just taking a class, you’re having an experience.” In fact, the type of learning in these courses was more “realistic” and
when asked about the class, many students described their flexible compared to traditional college courses. While in a
“experience,” not “the course” or “the class.” Several elements traditional course teachers instruct students in the subject
made studio courses especially effective for students, includ- area and assign specific assignments, in these courses teach-
ing the support and mentorship of the instructors, the open- ers did not give students specific assignments with specific
ended nature of the learning environment, and high levels of grading criteria. They guided them through the innovation
authentic motivation. process. An illustration student explained:
Faculty mentorship I am used to a class that is very structured. I do an
initial part of the drawing, I show my professor, and get
As mentioned in the introduction, faculty members had
feedback from him, and then I go back, make changes,
varying experience with this type of pedagogical context.
and keep reworking it until the finished product . . .
While some of the instructors were experienced in project-
For the first time, I am on my own, I have to figure out
based learning contexts, others were just beginning to teach
those problems by myself and figure out a solution. So
in this way. Faculty members highlighted a tension they had
I feel like I grew up a lot as an artist.
to navigate: they needed to support students through a new
type of learning context while at the same time letting stu-
Customizing the learning experience
dents explore on their own, sometimes even letting them
fail. One faculty member told us, “I’ve had to be more will- Because of the open nature of the courses, students were able
ing to let students learn for themselves, to let them fail at to customize their learning experience. An engineering stu-
times. I have to work against always jumping in to provide dent described:
the right answer.” Another faculty member commented on
You get to decide what your learning experience is like
the importance of beginning with a flexible course structure
. . . and place more emphasis on what you want to work
that could be adapted as needed and the need to proactively
on and what areas you’re weak in, then find those peo-
seek learner feedback throughout the course.
ple in the class that have different skill sets that can help
Three primary roles of faculty members were apparent in
push you in those areas . . . It’s more like customizing
the data. First, faculty guided students through the process
the learning experience exactly to how you want.
of design, including leading them in brainstorming sessions,
prototyping, and testing. Second, faculty members mentored Another student described how this customization added
students on their projects. Many class sessions consisted to the value of the course: “The freedom that you are given
of students working on projects in small groups, and we as a student in the class to make it your own and decide what
observed faculty meeting with each group and sometimes you want to work on makes the class particularly valuable.”
with individual students. Evidence of this theme was clear on Although the instructors structured the courses around a
end-of-course surveys where students rated the statement “I central problem, such as producing children’s storybooks or
felt the instructor was a mentor and a consultant more than a innovations for social change, in most courses students chose
typical teacher” an average of 4.17 (SD = 0.92). Third, faculty the specific projects to work on, the students they worked
pushed students to think critically about their ideas and bet- with, and their role on the team. One student reported, “I
ter consider user needs. This happened in various settings, wasn’t ‘forced’ into a particular learning role; rather, I could
including individual or small-group mentoring sessions as choose what I wanted to contribute based on my individual
well as whole-class discussion. Finally, faculty supported talents.” These feelings were widespread—survey partici-
students in navigating complicated contexts and obtaining pants rated the statement “I was able to choose the kind of
needed resources. For example, when a project was nega- role I played on the team and the kind of work I completed
tively affected by decisions government officials made with- on the project” an average of 4.18 (SD = 0.96)
out the students’ knowledge, the course instructors shared in
Managing work and deadlines
the frustration with the students and helped them find a new
way forward. In addition to setting individual goals and choosing team
roles, students took responsibility for managing the work
itself. One student commented, “I’ve learned how to ask for

and define the next step in our project instead of having it all High motivation appeared to come from factors in addi-
set up for me.” Students worked with their team to identify tion to grades. When we asked students to rate their per-
what tasks needed to be done and when they needed to be sonal motivation to do well beyond a grade on the project,
completed. their responses averaged 4.15 (SD = 1.00). Furthermore, stu-
The open structure and freedom to choose tasks and dead- dents rated the statement “I felt responsibility for my portion
lines meant students were often stepping into the unknown. of this project and for making it as good as possible” 4.45 (SD
As one student described, “Everything is new; everything is = 0.81). Students said that this motivation stemmed from the
trailblazing.” An engineering student added: following factors: (a) projects that had a significant impact
on the world, (b) completing authentic work relevant to their
Sometimes it’s just not possible with this thing
future careers, (c) student autonomy, and (d) collaboration
because we’re doing things that haven’t been done
with outside specialists and organizations.
before, necessarily. Whereas, I think a lot of classes . . .
it’s just a project that the teacher already has done, you Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Challenges and
know it works, you know you can do them, and here it’s Opportunities
more of a “maybe.”
Because of the interdisciplinary nature of these courses, stu-
Students experimented with new ideas because they felt dents developed problem-solving skills beyond what they
their instructors trusted them. A student who worked on the would normally build in a disciplinary studio course. By
ARG project described, “Trust and autonomy on all levels working with students from other fields, students expanded
allowed us the freedom to play around with ideas and pursue interpersonal skills, deepened disciplinary knowledge, and
avenues we might otherwise have been afraid to follow.” The expanded understandings of other disciplines. By the end of
open structure of the course gave students room to explore the courses, students indicated feeling that they were better
the unknown, and the trust of the instructors gave students prepared to enter the workforce.
the confidence to do so.
Teamwork and interpersonal skills
Students said that managing time in this setting was differ-
ent from managing time for traditional school assignments. Many of the things students learned were soft skills critical to
One student reported, “There is a vast difference between success in careers, such as communicating effectively, work-
homework assignment time tables and commercial time ing with others, and leading and managing a team. Students
tables. I surprised myself at how quickly I could get things worked with different kinds of people: people from differ-
done when I was under the gun.” A fine arts student simi- ent disciplines and with different work habits, communica-
larly explained, “Most classes focus on schedules and tests tion styles, and personalities. One student explained that
and books to teach various principles. However, this class the class “forces us to be with people that are not like us.”
allows students to feel what it’s like to have to make deadlines He said students learned “how to work together . . . and to
or else the client loses trust in the organization.” have things work and not work and dealing with different
people.” Other students agreed. One commented, “I learned
Authentic motivation
how to collaborate with people that I really didn’t like. That
Many students were motivated to do their best work for these was hard to do but was, in my opinion, successful.” Many
courses. An illustration student recounted, “I like the work students echoed this theme: working with different people,
I am doing in this class the most of any class I am taking . . sometimes people they didn’t like, was difficult, but it was a
. I feel like people are doing really good work, like pushing valuable experience.
themselves to do really good work.” Students took initia-
Learning from other students
tive to do extra work, including working on projects after the
semester was over. Students also wanted to expand the size Students said they normally worked with students from their
of the projects and expressed the desire to involve more stu- own discipline who used the same vocabulary and shared
dents. Finally, students wanted to share their project with similar perspectives. Students said the interdisciplinary col-
the community and the world. A student who worked on the laboration provided new perspectives on both their own dis-
Fundación Paraguaya project explained, “Once we had been cipline and other fields. An advertising student described,
thinking about it, and we kind of realized what this could be, “In advertising . . . we have all been taught the same things,
and we were just like, how does this not already exist? The so we have the same vocabulary, and even though we have
whole world needs to know about what this is and what it different perspectives, it’s still an advertising perspective.”
can do.” One of her teammates echoed, “The world needs to Other students described their experiences in their dis-
see this.” ciplines as being “stuck in a rut,” feeling “siloed,” and even

becoming “snobby.” However, students commented that the was supposed to play. Scott mentioned that he could have
CID courses “opened [their] eyes,” were “exciting,” provided been more proactive in offering support to other students.
“fresh perspectives,” and enabled “new opportunities.” Several students expressed feelings similar to John’s, Emily’s,
Students explained that working with others with differ- and Scott’s; some felt they didn’t have the background knowl-
ent views led to better ideas and products. An engineering edge or structure needed for successful collaboration, while
student explained, “To have all these different minds come others described the benefits of applying their disciplinary
together . . . you get better ideas, you get fresh ideas, and you knowledge to their projects.
just get different perspectives about everything.” Another Uneven workloads was another interdisciplinary chal-
student commented, “I enjoyed working [with other stu- lenge that students faced. The editing students in the story-
dents] because most of us came from different majors, so we book class described completing their part of the projects in
brought a variety of ideas and perspectives to the table.” the first few weeks of class and then had less work load. An
In addition to leading to potentially better ideas and prod- editing student described, “I feel like . . . it has been a little
ucts, students believed the interdisciplinary collaboration uneven, workwise, because we all have different roles, but
helped them grow within their own disciplines. Students those roles don’t necessarily play the same amount of time
learned techniques from other fields that they applied to and work, especially in a project like this.” The illustrators
their own work. For example, Emily, an English teaching described having too much to do in a four-month course.
major, and John, an illustration student, worked together A programming student who worked on the ARG project
in the children’s storybook class. Emily described her work also expressed concerns about work division. He said the
with John: first two to three weeks of the seven-week course were spent
researching science and “figuring out what the app’s sup-
It was so neat to have to challenge ideas, to really flesh
posed to be.” The programming students were not able to
out the characters because John is sitting here, “How
begin programming until a few weeks into the course, creat-
does that work?” So we were able to create a more in-
ing too little work at the beginning of the term and too much
depth story and universe . . . I would like to do that
at the end.
when I write more.
Another challenge that the collaborative environment
Emily found John’s methods of questioning her charac- presented was ensuring quality and providing students with
ters led to deeper character development and a better story. discipline-specific feedback. The students in the courses
John saw the characters through the eyes of an illustrator, came from different points in their degree programs and
and Emily’s writing profited from his perspective. John had different amounts of experience. A few older students
described similar benefits from his collaboration with Emily. were frustrated at the low quality of work from some of
He commented that the collaboration “really stretched me as their teammates. Working with students from other fields
an artist to think about things in a different way.” These stu- compounded this; students did not know how to help team-
dents’ experiences demonstrated how working with students mates from other disciplines. A senior majoring in illus-
in other fields lead to professional growth. tration explained, “It would be nice to have more critiques
with people in your field so that you could get opinions from
Collaboration challenges
other people who know exactly what they are talking about.”
Not all students had the same collaborative experience John Another student described not knowing how to give feed-
and Emily described. Scott, an editor participating in the back to her classmates:
same interview as John and Emily, explained:
One of the challenges as a writer is I am not used to
When John and Emily talked about how good of a col- working with illustrators that closely. When they ask
laboration there was, I am like, where is mine? Like for my feedback, I don’t want to step on your creative
I feel some of us had good collaboration, especially as liberty. I want you to be able to take this and make the
illustrator to author, but . . . as an editor, I was kind of vision you want with it. Finding that balance between
the spell checker, and not so much the helper. letting them do that and actually giving good feedback
was something.
Further group discussion revealed that this problem
might have developed because students didn’t know how to Students navigated these challenges by consulting univer-
use an editor. Although John and Emily described having a sity faculty and specialists in their own field.
good collaborative session with student editors early in the
course, they did not utilize editors at all during the rest of
the semester. They said they didn’t know what role an editor

Communication Disciplinary knowledge

Students learned that successfully working with different Through these courses, some students gained knowledge
people required effective communication skills, including and developed skills related to their major programs. Like
careful listening and the ability to explain difficult concepts Paula, the advertising management student described above,
to others. An advertising student described learning to lis- many students were able to practice skills they learned in
ten. He said that his communication style was short and to core classes, resulting in a deeper understanding of their
the point, and he got frustrated with students who talked disciplines. A student majoring in English and minoring in
for lengthy periods. He explained, “I always tried to take editing described:
everyone’s opinion, but get the gist of what they are saying,
I feel like as an editor I learned things that I wouldn’t
put it together, and . . . make a decision and move forward.”
have learned in my [editing class]. I learned how to
However, he noticed that other students communicated
work with an author and see what she wants for her
differently: “A lot of the more creative minds really have to
book and be able to help her capture her vision . . . You
express a lot to come to their final conclusion. I felt like it
really get hands-on experience like you would get in an
was beating around the bush. They felt like it was an expres-
internship.
sion of their inner passion and desire.” He explained how his
feelings changed over the course of the semester: Others had similar experiences. Several programming
students said they learned how to apply new programming
It was very hard in the beginning of the semester to
languages to different settings. An art student learned to be
listen to everyone’s ideas . . . In the end, though, their
mindful of his audience: “I learned that a visual style for an
vision was so clear, and they were just trying to explain
expansive project like this one needs to be clearly decided
their whole vision . . . that has made the project a lot
with the audience in mind.” A student majoring in music
better because their vision was so great. I think that
composition also described becoming more aware of his
me, as a more count person, I have to learn how to . . .
audience: “I learned . . . more about the audiences my music
be patient, and listen to the whole process, because the
targets.” These skills will assist students in their careers.
end result was really quite beautiful.
Learning about other disciplines
In addition, students found that disparate vocabular-
ies made communication with peers from other disciplines The interdisciplinary nature of CID courses also exposed
difficult. An advertising student explained, “Coming in students to skills outside of their disciplines, as evidenced by
and working with everyone, sometimes it took us a while survey responses. Students rated the statement “I learned
to get over the different viewpoints and vocabulary . . . we new things unrelated to my previous areas of expertise”
were just talking in circles . . . Once we figured it out, it was an average of 4.44. In particular, students gained specific
like we all wanted the same thing the whole time.” Students skills they needed to work effectively on projects with those
also needed to learn how to explain their work to those of from other disciplines. For example, an advertising student
other disciplines. A student who worked on the ARG proj- learned about computer programming when she became a
ect told us, “I’ve learned how to explain technical, or things writer for a character in a computer program. She described,
that I’m more an expert at, in a way that other people can “I am lead writer for the AI [Artificial Intelligence] character,
understand.” Several engineering students who worked on so in order to write her dialogue I had to learn a little bit of
the ARG project described struggling to explain what tech- how to make that work in the code, rather than just write it
nology “can and cannot do” to those from other fields. For like a script.” As we described above, the engineering stu-
example, students were working on a “chatbot,” a computer dents taught her the principles of programming she needed
application designed to have a conversation with users. The to write the script. Other students described learning more
programming students collaborated with writing students about science education and marketing, as well as developing
who would write the script for the program, and the engi- new skills such as using Photoshop and WordPress software.
neering students had to explain the technical limitations of Students also described learning through casual interac-
the programs to the writers. Many students felt that the abil- tions with their peers. Several students said they enjoyed
ity to explain disciplinary-specific concepts to others was watching “how artists create work,” or “what goes into illus-
vital to working well with those of other disciplines and good tration.” They learned about the video making process and
preparation for their careers. advertising briefs. Several students said they discovered new
hobbies from their interactions with their peers.

Preparing for the future and Resnick (1999) described as thick authenticity, an inter-
action of four types of authenticity. Our analysis here high-
The students we interviewed recognized the future value of
lights the challenges of meeting all four types of authenticity
the skills they developed in CID courses, including an adver-
simultaneously. However, despite this limitation, students
tising student who commented, “I think this atmosphere and
still reported having a valuable and rich learning experience.
learning space has been the most useful thing for me so far.”
Many students believed that this usefulness was grounded in Thick Authenticity
the practical and problem-based nature of CID projects. An
In our analysis, we identified evidence of several types of
engineering student explained, “You are making a product
authenticity as described by Shaffer and Resnick (1999).
that is more like what you’re going to be doing in the career
First, students described projects as personally meaning-
you’re in.”
ful: they wanted to do their best work, including extra work
Several students said that their experiences in the CID
where necessary, because they cared about the work they
studio will help them transition into the workforce. While
were doing. They had the autonomy to set their own goals
describing his internship experience in New York, Levi
and work towards them. Strong evidence for this theme was
explained, “I think the learning curve that you kill by being
present on end-of-course surveys, where students rated their
in an activity like this is going to be amazing. I feel so much
deep, personal motivation an average of 4.15 (SD = 1.00),
more prepared for . . . the rest of my life.” Another advertising
and feelings of personal responsibility for their work an aver-
student also said her experience would “break the learning
age of 4.45 (SD = 0.81). Lee et al. (2014) similarly found
curve”: “It is so useful, and it is so ahead as far as educa-
meaningful work contributed to intrinsic motivation, result-
tion goes . . . You are going to break the learning curve. You
ing in students choosing to work extra days. The second type
are going to be ahead and you are going to understand a lot
of authenticity described by Shaffer and Resnick is learning
more things than you would if you had just stuck your head
that relates to the real-world, including completing work that
in your bubble.” These students believed participation in
impacts the broader community. This is particularly evident
CID courses would give them a jump-start on their careers.
in one student’s comment that “the whole world needs to
Students mentioned several skills that will help them
know [about their project] and what it can do.”
“break the learning curve,” including working with different
The third type of authenticity Shaffer and Resnick (1999)
kinds of people and working autonomously. An advertis-
described was learning that provided opportunities for
ing student felt that her experience working with different
students to think in the modes of their disciplines. Some
people would help her:
students showed evidence of this type of authenticity. For
We are going to be graduating and actually be going example, one student reported that she felt “like an editor,”
into production with a lot of projects that we work on, including learning things she wouldn’t have learned in her
really anywhere I go, especially if I plan on working at editing classes, things that took hands-on experience to
an agency or anything, I am going to be working with understand. However, other students did not have the same
these people in the future. experience. John described not knowing how to act as an
editor and didn’t experience as rich of a collaborative expe-
Students also valued the skills they learned from other
rience. We discuss more about disciplinary learning in the
disciplines. One student explained that the courses were
next section.
“a great way to learn about what other students study and
The fourth type of authenticity, assessments that reflect
how that applies to my future environment.” A music stu-
the learning process, showed less prevalence in students’
dent agreed. He said that learning about business and public
statements. Very few students discussed assessment prac-
relations would help him as a composer. Students believed
tices beyond the irrelevance of grades. Our interview ques-
that they would enter the workforce with more confidence
tions did not directly address assessment practices, and
because of their participation in CID projects.
instructors might provide more insight into how they knew
Discussion students were learning. However, assessing project-based
learning can be difficult and it is crucial to student’s learning;
In this study, we sought to understand students’ experiences in particular, instructors must assess both the final project
in interdisciplinary design studio courses, including the and deeper content understanding (Lee et al., 2014). Future
challenges and opportunities stemming from project-based iterations might consider prompting instructors to reflect on
learning that was interdisciplinary. In the literature review, embedding authentic assessment into their courses.
we suggested that the interdisciplinary, project-based learn-
ing supported by the studio is an example of what Shaffer

The interdisciplinary and project-based format strongly research of faculty members. She described constructing a
supported personally meaningful and relevant work, but common, third vocabulary with collaborators, even record-
attention to disciplinary structures and assessment were lim- ing key terms and definitions on index cards. Students, in
ited. Future project- and problem-based learning programs particular, need support as they come to understand disci-
should look for creative ways to support disciplinary devel- plinary boundaries and perspectives (Lattuca, Knight, &
opment and assessment in interdisciplinary programs. For Bergom, 2013).
example, students might be required to consult with a faculty
member from their discipline throughout the project or to Research Limitations
reflect on lessons learned from the group project for their
While we believe the findings presented in this paper are well
own individual discipline. Such an approach would enable
supported by the data, there are still many limitations to this
students to better connect with disciplinary knowledge and
study that require caution in generalizing the findings. First,
get feedback on their work; however, consultants would need
while the courses involved were interdisciplinary, the number
guidance on the type of assistance that is appropriate within
of disciplines participating was still small and mostly design-
the pedagogic structure (see Irby, 1996).
focused. What is yet unknown is how effectively other disci-
Challenges of Interdisciplinary Project-Based Learning plines that do not emphasize creative problem-solving and
design as heavily could be integrated into these experiences.
The challenges described by students are similar to those
In addition, the interviews with students were largely done as
identified in other studies of project-based learning and
focus groups, and thus limited by the potential for bias and
interdisciplinary collaboration. First, some students strug-
groupthink. Finally, the findings in this paper are based on
gled collaborating with others because of lack of disciplin-
self-description and student perceptions, and thus may not
ary support and feedback. Providing disciplinary support
be completely accurate. Future research is needed to better
is important in pedagogic collaboration (Davies & Devlin,
validate these findings with a more diverse sample and more
2010; Helle et al., 2006; Lee et al., 2014; Spelt et al., 2011).
in-depth research methods, including assessment of student
An interesting example comes from Self and Baek’s (2017)
learning, creativity, and interdisciplinary competencies via a
study of interdisciplinary team teaching. In their study, stu-
variety of methods.
dents rated single-instructor courses higher than courses
with multiple instructors. The authors proposed a lack of
disciplinary depth might have contributed to these results:
Conclusion: Lessons Learned for Future
team teachers were more reluctant to emphasize any single
Implementation
discipline, resulting in no disciplinary foundation. This sug- Overall, students describe benefiting from courses held in the
gests that disciplinary depth, even if that depth comes from interdisciplinary design studio because of the thick authen-
outside a student’s core discipline, impacts students’ experi- ticity of the interdisciplinary project-based learning. Future
ences in interdisciplinary courses. instantiations of this type of design studio should pay heed
Second, collaboration was difficult because in many proj- to meeting the four types of authenticity described by Shaffer
ects, students had varying workloads and timelines. For and Resnick (1999). Particularly, instructors should carefully
example, in the ARG project, programming students were consider how assessment methods both reflect the learning
not able to begin their work until much of the app design was process and are effective at evaluating deep student learning.
complete, leaving a significant amount of work for the end of The challenges students described suggest additional sup-
the semester. Managing workloads is a common problem in port and scaffolding, particularly as it applies to supporting
interdisciplinary project-based learning (Helle et al., 2006). disciplinary thinking and learning, might allow for a more
For example, Contantinto et al. (2010) reported engineering successful experience. Faculty who teach project-based,
and art students played different roles in an interdisciplin- interdisciplinary courses should consider how to support
ary project, resulting in less design work for art students. students in developing and applying disciplinary knowledge
Students felt this limited the collaboration opportunities. and interdisciplinary collaboration skills (including man-
Other scholars observed students commonly underestimate aging time and expectations as well as building a common
the time and effort required to complete projects (Brassler & vocabulary.
Dettmers, 2017; Epstein, 2005). All in all, the project-based courses in the CID studio
Finally, like in other interdisciplinary contexts, students moved learning beyond traditional courses and beyond
struggled communicating across disciplines; each disci- intra-disciplinary studio pedagogy. They provided stu-
pline used different vocabulary and communication styles. dents instead with opportunities to experience first-hand
Epstein (2005) described a similar issue in interdisciplinary

the advantages and challenges of interdisciplinary creativity. 839–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9254-5

When much of education emphasizes closed-ended testing Clinton, G., & Rieber, L. P. (2010). The Studio experience at
and knowledge retention, opportunities such as those pro- the University of Georgia: an example of constructionist
vided through interdisciplinary creative problem-solving are learning for adults. Educational Technology Research and
crucial to teaching students that “many problems have mul- Development, 58(6), 755–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/
tiple ‘right’ answers” (Grupas, 1990, p. 4) and that interdis- s11423-010-9165-2
ciplinary collaboration is often key to more productive work Connor, A., Sosa, R., Jackson, A. G., & Marks, S. (2017).
in their careers. Problem solving at the edge of disciplines. In C. Zhou
(Ed.), Handbook of research on creative problem-solving
skill development in higher education (pp. 212–234). Her-
References shey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-
Brandt, C. B., Cennamo, K., Douglas, S., Vernon, M., 0643-0.ch010
McGrath, M., & Reimer, Y. (2011). A theoretical frame- Cotantino, T., Kellam, N., Cramond, B., & Crowder, I. (2010).
work for the studio as a learning environment. Interna- An interdisciplinary design studio: How can art and engi-
tional Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), neering collaborate to increase students’ creativity? Art
329–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9181-5 Education, 63(2), 49–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/0004312
Brassler, M., & Dettmers, J. (2017). How to enhance interdis- 5.2010.11519062
ciplinary competence—Interdisciplinary problem-based Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. London:
learning versus interdisciplinary project-based learn- Springer.
ing. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, Davies, M., & Devlin, M. (2010). Interdisciplinary higher
11(2), 12. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1686 education. In Interdisciplinary higher education: Perspec-
Broadfoot, O., & Bennett, R. (2003). Design studios: Online? tives and practicalities (pp. 3–28). Bingley, England: Emer-
Comparing traditional face-to-face design studio educa- ald Group Publishing Ltd. Retrieved from http://dro.
tion with modern internet-based design studios. In Apple deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30033737/devlin-interdisciplin-
University Consortium Academic and Developers Con- aryhigher-post-2010.pdf
ference Proceedings 2003 (pp. 9–21). Adelaide, Australia. Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Create new thinking by
Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/dow design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
nload;jsessionid=E36FCCD1F9EB81E5B9D66D1014D59 English, L. D. (2008). Interdisciplinary problem solving:
989?doi=10.1.1.124.3548&rep=rep1&type=pdf A focus on engineering experiences. In Proceedings of
Brocato, K. (2009). Studio based learning: Proposing, cri- the 31st Annual Conference of the Mathematics Educa-
tiquing, iterating our way to person-centeredness for bet- tion Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1, pp. 187–193).
ter classroom management. Theory Into Practice, 48(2), ERIC. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
138–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840902776459 ED503747.pdf#page=180
Bronet, F., Eglash, R., Gabriele, G., Hess, D., & Kagan, L. Epstein, R., Schmidt, S. M., & Warfel, R. (2008). Measuring
(2003). Product design and innovation: Evolution of an and training creativity competencies: Validation of a new
interdisciplinary design curriculum. International Journal test. Creativity Research Journal, 20(1), 7–12. https://doi.
of Engineering Education, 19(1), 183–191. org/10.1080/10400410701839876
Buchanan, R. (1998). Branzi’s dilemma: Design in contem- Epstein, S. L. (2005). Making interdisciplinary collaboration
porary culture. Design Issues, 14(1), 3–20. https://doi. work. In S. J. Derry, C. D. Schunn, & M. A. Gernsbacher
org/10.2307/1511825 (Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cog-
Carbone, A., & Sheard, J. (2002). Developing a model of stu- nitive science (pp. 245–264). New York, NY: Psychology
dent learning in a studio-based teaching environment. Press.
Informing Science, 5, 203–215. Fundación Paraguaya: Poverty stoplight. (2014). Retrieved
Cennamo, K. (2016). What is studio. In E. Boling, R. A. August 17, 2017 from http://www.fundacionparaguaya.
Schwier, C. M. Gray, K. M. Smith, & K. Campbell (Eds.), org.py/?page_id=490
Studio teaching in higher education: Selected design cases Grant, M. M. (2011). Learning, beliefs, and products: Stu-
(pp. 248–259). New York, NY: Routledge. dents’ perspectives with project-based learning. Interdisci-
Cennamo, K., & Brandt, C. (2012). The “right kind of tell- plinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2), 6. https://
ing”: Knowledge building in the academic design studio. doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1254
Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(5), Grupas, A. (1990). Creative problem solving. In The Annual
Meeting of the Missouri Association of Community and

Junior Colleges. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/ Magazine of Higher Learning, 46(6) http://www.tandfon-
fulltext/ED343813.pdf line.com/doi/full/10.1080/00091383.2012.728953
Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness Partnership for 21st century skills: Framework for 21st cen-
of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and tury learning. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.p21.
Technology Journal, 29(2), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/ org/about-us/p21-framework
BF02766777 Rittel, H., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.
settings. Albany, New York: State University of New York. Runco, M. A., Plucker, J. A., & Lim, W. (2001). Development
Helle, L., Tynjälä, P., & Olkinuora, E. (2006). Project-based and psychometric integrity of a measure of ideational
learning in post-secondary education—theory, practice behavior. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3-4), 393–400.
and rubber sling shots. Higher Education, 51(2), 287–314. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_16
Irby, D. M. (1996). Models of faculty development for prob- Self, J. A., & Baek, J. S. (2017). Interdisciplinarity in design
lem-based learning. Advances in Health Sciences Educa- education: Understanding the undergraduate student
tion, 1(1), 69-81. experience. International Journal of Technology and Design
Jordan, M. E., Kleinsasser, R. C., & Roe, M. F. (2014). Wicked Education, 27(3), 459–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/
problems: Inescapable wickedity. Journal of Education for s10798-016-9355-2
Social Work, 40(4), 415–430. Shaffer, D. W. (2003). Portrait of the Oxford Design Studio:
Katehi, L., & Ross, M. (2007). Technology and culture: An ethnography of design pedagogy. WCER Working Paper
Exploring the creative instinct through cultural interpre- No. 2003-11. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/full-
tations. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(2), 89–90. text/ED497579.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2007.tb00919.x Shaffer, D. W., & Resnick, M. (1999). “Thick” authenticity:
Kellam, N., & Cramond, B. (2010). An interdisciplinary New media and authentic learning. Journal of Interactive
design studio: How can art and engineering collaborate to Learning Research, 10(2), 195–215.
increase students’ creativity? Art Education, 63(2), 49–54. Smart, E., Darowski, E. S., & Armstrong, M. (2019). Library
Kezar, A. (2005). Redesigning for collaboration within higher integration with design thinking courses. In D. M. Mueller
education institutions: An exploration into the develop- (Ed.), Recasting the narrative: ACRL Conference proceed-
mental process. Research in Higher Education, 46(7), 831– ings (pp. 356–368). Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/
860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-6227-5 acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/conferences/confsand-
Lattuca, L. R. (2002). Learning interdisciplinarity: Sociocul- preconfs/2019/InspirationIdeationImplementation.pdf
tural perspectives on academic work. The Journal of Higher Sochacka, N., Guyotte, K. W., Walther, J., Kellam, N. N., &
Education, 73(6), 711–739. https://doi.org/10.1353/ Costantino, T. (2013). Faculty reflections on a STEAM-
jhe.2002.0054 inspired interdisciplinary studio course. In American Soci-
Lattuca, L. R., Knight, D., & Bergom, I. (2013). Developing ety for Engineering Education Annual Conference and
a measure of interdisciplinary competence. International Exposition. Atlanta, GA.
Journal of Engineering Education, 29(3), 726–739. Spelt, E. J. H., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Luning, P. A., &
Lee, J. (2014). The integrated design process from the Mulder, M. (2009). Teaching and learning in interdisci-
facilitator’s perspective. International Journal of Art plinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational
& Design Education, 33(1), 141–156. https://doi. Psychology Review, 21(4), 365. https://doi.org/10.1007/
org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2014.12000.x s10648-009-9113-z
Lee, J. S., Blackwell, S., Drake, J., & Moran, K. A. (2014). Tak- Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. The Journal of Psy-
ing a leap of faith: Redefining teaching and learning in chology, 36(2), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022398
higher education through project-based learning. Inter- 0.1953.9712897
disciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 8(2), 2. Tassoni, J. P., & Lewiecki-Wilson, C. (2005). Not just any-
https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1426 where, anywhen: Mapping change through studio work.
Lyall, C., Meagher, L., Bandola, J., & Kettle, A. (2015). Inter- Journal of Basic Writing, 68–92. https://www.jstor.org/
disciplinary provision in higher education: Current and stable/43443811
future challenges (pp. 1–97). University of Edinburgh. Vygotsky S., L. (1978). Interaction between learning and
Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/ development. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, &
files/interdisciplinary_provision_in_he.pdf E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development
McCoy, S. K., & Gardner, S. K. (2012). Interdisciplinary of higher psychological processes (pp. 79–91). Cambridge,
collaboration on campus: Five questions. Change: The MA: President and Fellows of Harvard College. Retrieved

from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4139900 Melissa Warr is a doctoral candidate in the Mary Lou Fulton
West, R. E. (2016). Breaking down walls to creativity through Teachers College at Arizona State University. Her research
interdisciplinary design. Educational Technology, 56(6), blends teacher education, design, creativity, and technology.
47-52. She is currently exploring design perspectives on teachers’
Wilson, J. M. (1994). The CUPLE physics studio. Physics professional learning and identity, and addressing educa-
Teacher, 32(9), 518–523. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2344100 tional challenges through multi-stakeholder co-design. She
Wilson, L., & Blackwell, A. F. (2013). Interdisciplinarity and is also a violinist and regularly performs with religious and
innovation. In E. G. Carayannis (Ed.), Encyclopedia of community groups. Her scholarship is available on her per-
creativity, invention, innovation and entrepreneurship (pp. sonal website at http://melissa-warr.com.
1097–1105). New York, NY: Springer New York. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_371 Dr. Richard E. West (@richardewest on twitter) is an associ-
Zaugg, H., & Warr, M. C. (2018). Integrating a creativity, ate professor in the Instructional Psychology and Technology
innovation, and design studio within an academic library. Department at Brigham Young University. He teaches
Library Management, 39(3/4), 172–187. https://doi. courses in instructional technology, learning theory, aca-
org/10.1108/LM-09-2017-0091 demic research and writing, creativity and innovation, and
product/program evaluation. His research focuses on how
to create learning environments that prepare students for
the twenty-first century, including designing learning envi-
ronments that foster group creativity through design think-
ing, utilizing microcredentials and open badges to promote
competency learning, and technologies to develop online
learning communities. His scholarship is available on his
personal website at http://richardewest.com and at http://
bit.ly/rickwestscholar.

Appendix A
Student Interview Protocol
Group Interview Questions

1. How was this class similar or different from other classes you’ve had at BYU?
2. In this project, you worked on a very diverse team, with people who have different perspectives or disciplines. What
benefit or challenges did this collaboration provide?
3. What are your thoughts about having the class and project here in the library space? What worked well about the
arrangement? What could be improved?
4. Who did you work with (librarians, other faculty) to complete your project? Please describe how you discovered them.
How helpful was it?
5. What did you learn from the project that related specifically to your content area?
6. What did you learn from the project that was outside of your content area?
7. Did you learn anything that is not really related to school at all that you thought was important? What was it, and how
did you learn it? (creative process? Project management? Teamwork?)
8. Would you take a class like this again, similar structure but different project? Why or why not?
9. Tell me the three most important things or events that were critical to this project?
10. (Probe) How did those events occur? Who was involved? what happened? how did you develop the ideas?
Questions for informal interviews during observations

1. What is currently happening in the design (creativity process)?
2. How do you feel about what is happening? (What is working well what is not?)
3. What surprises you about the creativity process thus far?
4. What resources are available to help you with your project?
5. What do you anticipate will happen next?

Appendix B
Observation Protocol
Date: Location: Instructor(s):
Time Activity
People
Initials Name Description
Date: Location: Environment
General Notes

Appendix C
Open-Response Survey Questions
We administered the full survey four times: April 2014, June 2014, December 2014, and April 2015. Scaled questions
were identical in all surveys, but open-response questions differed slightly. See Appendix E for scaled survey questions.
Additionally, we administered a pre-course survey in September 2014 and January 2015.
April 2014 Non-Scaled Questions
• What is your major?
• What year are you in school?
• What is your gender?
• How useful was the experience overall for you as a student? Please explain and give specific examples.
• How does this type of experience compare with your other BYU learning experiences?
• What kinds of things did you learn?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach?
• How can we improve the usefulness of the space where the class was taught and of the experience itself?
• With WHOM did you engage with (students, faculty library personnel) to complete the project?
• What PLACES on/off campus did you use to work on the project?
• What kind of SERVICES were helpful in completing the project?
• What kind of TOOLS and SUPPLIES were helpful in completing the project?
June 2014 Non-Scaled Questions
• Which college and department are you from?
• How useful was the experience in this class and/or participating in this project overall for you as a student?
Please explain and give specific examples.
• How does this type of experience compare with your other BYU learning experiences?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach?
• How did the space and location for the class (in the library) contribute to or detract from the learning experi-
ence? Please give specific examples.
• What did you learn, if anything, this semester, related to your content area? Please give specific examples.
• What did you learn, if anything, this semester not related to your content area? For example, consider other
content areas, or even non-content learning, such as how to be more creative, collaborative, etc. Please give
specific examples.
• Outside of your instructors, did you work with or learn from anyone else to help you in this class? For exam-
ple, consider librarians, other faculty or students from your department, outside professionals, etc. If so,
please list who they were and what they helped you with.
• What PLACES and RESOURCES on/off campus did you use to work on the project?
April 2015 Non-Scaled Questions
• Which course are you enrolled in?
• How does this type of experience compare with your other BYU learning experiences? What are the strengths
and weaknesses of this approach?

specific examples.
September 2014 Non-Scaled Questions (Pre-course survey)
• Which college are you from?
• What are your reasons for registering for this course? Please be specific.
• What do you hope to learn this semester in your content area (discipline)?
• Is there anything you hope to learn this semester not related to your content area? Please give specific examples.
December 2014 Non-Scaled Questions
• What course are you enrolled in?
• What other innovation or creativity courses have you taken? Please be specific—provide course number and
semester if possible.
• How does this type of experience compare with your other BYU learning experiences? What are the strengths
and weaknesses of this approach?
specific examples.
September 2014 Non-scaled Questions (Pre-course survey)
• Which college are you from?
• Which course are you enrolled in?
• Outside of this class, in what ways do you typically use the library and library services?
• What are your reasons for registering for this course? Please be specific.
• What do you hope to learn this semester in your content area (discipline)?
• Is there anything you hope to learn this semester not related to your content area? Please give specific examples.

Appendix D
Results of Scaled Survey Questions
Course Experience
Statement n M(SD) min max

I had a deep, personal motivation to do well on this project beyond just for my grade 103 4.15 (1.00) 1 5
I felt responsibility for my portion of this project and for making it as good as possible 103 4.45 (0.81) 1 5
I had freedom to make choices about the design of my portion of the project 103 4.17 (0.97) 1 5
I was able to choose the kind of role I played on the team and the kind of work I com- 103 4.18 (0.96) 1 5
pleted on the project
Prototyping helped us make the project more creative and of a higher quality 103 3.88 (0.99) 1 5
I felt like everyone in the group was on equal footing and authority 103 3.37 (1.27) 1 5
In this experience, I learned in part by critiquing the work of others 103 3.73 (1.06) 1 5
In this experience, I learned through the critiques others gave me 103 3.94 (0.93) 1 5
I felt like the instructor was a mentor and a consultant more than a typical teacher 103 4.17 (0.92) 1 5
I learned new things unrelated to my previous areas of expertise and interest. 103 4.2 (0.94) 1 5
Note. Students were asked to rate each statement on a scale of 1 – 5, with 1 meaning “strongly disagree” and 5 meaning “strongly agree.”
Epstein Creativity Competencies Inventory

I only like tasks that have a high probability of success 105 3.15 (0.94) 2 5
I rarely change the decorations in my work environment 105 2.92 (1.09) 1 5
I plan to read books and articles from areas outside my specialty 105 4.18 (0.94) 1 5
I do not share my ideas with others 105 1.68 (0.79) 1 5
I only seek training within my specialty 104 1.85 (0.83) 1 4
I do not like to work on problems that have no solution 105 2.72 (1.11) 1 5
I am not afraid of failure 105 3.44 (1.08) 1 5
I do not need any more colleagues 104 1.96 (0.89) 1 5
I enjoy working with the same group of people all the time 104 2.74 (0.92) 1 5
Note. Students were asked to rate each statement on a scale of 1 – 5, with one meaning “strongly disagree” and five meaning
“strongly agree.”

Runco Ideational Behavior Scale

I come up with a lot of ideas or solutions to problems 96 4.2 (0.76) 1 5
I like to play around with ideas for the fun of it 96 4.26 (0.73) 1 5
I enjoy having leeway in the things I do and room to make up my own mind 96 4.41 (0.72) 1 5
I would take a college course based on original ideas 96 4.16 (0.99) 1 5
I am able to think about things intensely for many hours 96 3.86 (0.99) 1 5
Sometimes I get so interested in a new idea that I forget about other things I 96 4.2 (0.79) 2 5
should be doing
I often find that one of my ideas has led me to other ideas which have led 96 4.05 (0.85) 1 5
me to other ideas, and I end up with an idea and do not know where it came
from
I am able to think up answers that haven’t already been figured out 94 3.96 (0.77) 1 5
I am good at combining ideas that others have not tried 95 4.14 (0.77) 1 5
Friends ask me to help them think of ideas and solutions 95 4.11 (0.81) 1 5
I have ideas about new inventions or about how to improve things 94 3.97 (0.85) 1 5
I have a good imagination 95 4.28 (0.81) 1 5
I feel I could lead a future project using a similar creative process to that used 94 4.06 (1.00) 1 5
in this class
Note. Students were asked to rate each statement on a scale of 1 – 5, with one meaning “strongly disagree” and five meaning
“strongly agree.”

28590-Article Text-74224-3-10-20200603

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

28590-Article Text-74224-3-10-20200603

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Interdisciplinary Journal of

Melissa Warr (Brigham Young University)

Copyright Holder: Melissa Warr and Richard E. West

https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28590 March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Keywords: project-based learning, design studio, interdisciplinary creativity

https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28590 March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

3 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

5 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Table 2. Student research participants by discipline

7 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

8 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

The Interdisciplinary Design Studio Experience Open-ended learning

9 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

10 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

11 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Communication Disciplinary knowledge

12 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

13 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

14 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

the advantages and challenges of interdisciplinary creativity. 839–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9254-5

15 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

16 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

17 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Group Interview Questions

Questions for informal interviews during observations

18 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Date: Location: Instructor(s):

Date: Location: Environment

19 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

20 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

21 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Statement n M(SD) min max

Epstein Creativity Competencies Inventory

22 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

Runco Ideational Behavior Scale

23 | www.ijpbl.org (ISSN 1541-5015) March 2020 | Volume 14 | Issue 1

You might also like